Thread regarding Phillips 66 layoffs

Regardless of vote Laisher has got to go.

Regardless of vote - there is one conclusion that is pretty much universal - Laisher has got to go. He's a failed CEO. He's done miserably in the shareholder defense. He has no vision or can't articulate it. His commentary on the earnings calls make it seem like he barely knows his business. Now, that may not be the case. I thought he was a smart guy, probably is, but the role of the CEO is to define and sell the vision. He's done none of that. Perhaps this was the error in hiring him from a non-public JV because the stakeholders were "internal." I wanted him to step up but he's not cut out for this. Lacks vision and can't even make a compelling case. Even if the white card were to win, which is looking like long odds at this point, the board needs to be done with Laisher. Admit he was a mistake and move on. That goes for several other ELT members as well. I will say first, they will be fine financially - this is what is not simply best for the company but necessary. He will go down in as perhaps the worst CEO in the history of this company, galavanting around on private jets with his entourage all over the country accepting pay-to-play awards, while failing to defend and articulate the clear value proposition that the company has. Laisher will be a case study in what not to do when assuming the helm of a company. Maybe he should have stuck to the lab, where his true passions lie. But for me, as a shareholder and former employee, he's got to go - the cancer must be cut out or the patient will die. That isn't defending Elliott as the right course, rather it is a necessity for the company and those people still working there, as well as the shareholders.

by
| 2392 views | | 8 replies (last May 21, 2025) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1jvqbg600

8 replies (most recent on top)

Add to the list - CFO, GC and Investor Relations. All have received huge financial rewards for little to no value added.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ep+1jvqbg600

It’s simple. He has the CPChem lineage. They like that chemicals background for some reason. Why else would they not divest cpchem?
The new board will torque them nuts real tight.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @dp+1jvqbg600

He is a very poor leader, and many fall in line like little ducklings. They too need to go!

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ce+1jvqbg600

Agreed , he is a case study by itself cannot read anything without a teleprompter. Not sure what GG and board of directors saw in him to be qualified leading this company

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @bh+1jvqbg600

Can we get the “success share” back since the new employees that Mark bought won’t be around? I mean it won’t cost the Company that much with them gone.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @am+1jvqbg600

100%

Very poor leader. I can't imagine he's actually as useless as he seems, but damn does he need to go

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ae+1jvqbg600

I agree with everything in the original post.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @a3+1jvqbg600

Post a reply

: